Popogeejo

You picked a bad day to make this thread, didn't you? It's gonna be Xbox180 from here on out.

But to address you question: I like the term Xbone. People naturally contract a name when they can and this one works terribly well. It's almost like it was intended. The actual name is simply bad. Even if you don't like "Xbone" "Xbox One" sounds/reads worse to me. It's the same with Playstation. On it's own it sounded fine but Playstation 2 and 3? Sounds dull. Initialising the names then made it sound somewhat better and, importantly for the internet, gave you good shorthand. Losing two letters isn't as much of a deal but it still tidies up the name, makes it one word and can be used without sounding positive or negative.

People could go for XB1 but then you have the PS4. That's +3 on the XB. It's also not the first XB which makes things kind of silly.

On the whole the proper name is terrible and Xbone just feels better to a lot of people. Can't blame them for MS giving their console a bad name and reacting. If you're letting a term like this affect your opinion of what they're saying and how seriously you take what they say then you're already taking thee whole concept far too seriously.

Short answer: No.

Long answer: Kind of but in the end they won't care if they need to change thing up. They will have no issues with going back on their word and letting marketing explain how they aren't really going back on what they said.

Looking at your points in a mixed up order;

2) Sony can package their camera and add $50 - $100 to their price. They can change just as much as Mircosoft.No idea why you think MS is in a more flexible situation here, either, when they've made such a deal about Kinect. They've really nailed their colours to the mast here. If they start the remove it then that's a big problem for them.

Also, Sony has a camera. They can tap into that Just Dance Market just as well as the Wii somehow did.

1) Current market patterns suggest heavily that second hand market isn't going to do anything dramatic. There are changes in the future, that's for sure but nothing foreseeable that's going to decimate Sony. They have business analysts so they're not making blind promises here. They've thought things out as best they can. This doesn't mean they're totally safe, they've fucked up massively before, but they've not locked themselves into trouble here. If things really go south they can just PR their way through changing policy.

3) Again, they have business people doing research. They likely have some idea of what they are doing with Indie devs. Indie hasn't hurt Microsoft, Steam or anyone else. I don't see why PS4 trying to do a better job there is a problem.

Despite what the PS3 has strongly suggested Sony aren't completely stupid and while your points could present issues it's not all that likely to be game changers. They've had meetings and meetings and looked at data and charts before saying what they said. They probably have a fair bit of confidence and hard data to back up what they're doing.

I don't mean to be rude but I think they have a better grasp of their business plans than either of us do.

Doesn't that miss the point? Stealth games are paced very intentionally. if they wanted they could just make the games play faster (smaller rooms/sections, shorter or more telegraphed patrols). The long waits are very intentional. The build up tension and make the sense of accomplishment when you get past them that much sweeter. Patient players who take the time to learn the patterns get rewarded by not being shot to shit while impatient players get to roll by gut feelings and running and gunning when things go wrong should the game allow for this and MGS totally will.

If you need timelapse (or, as it really seems to be; fast forwarding) then your level is probably poorly designed or you're playing the wrong genre and should jump into an action game.

1: Dark Souls - 35 hours (and I'm still not past Smaug and Ornstein ;_;)

2: Altitude - 27 hours

3: Counter Strike: GO - 20 hours

4: Binding of Isaac - 19 hours

5: Frozen Synapse - 15 hours

It's odd because other than Dark Souls I don't feel I played these games that much. I thought Recettear, Dungeons of Dreadmor and Super Meat Boy would be further up there though they aren't far off. Saints Row 3 will probably edge in to #5 for a few months soon.

Nintendo "gets away with it" because they usually do it well. Recently it's been a bit weaker with several of the New Super Mario Bros games lacking anything really new (though the 4 player madness of the Wii game earns a lot of credit.) Kirby is great example of them doing it right. There are a bunch of Kirby games but only a few of them really stick to the original formula while many others present very new ideas while still holding onto the core "personality" of Kirby (see the golf game as a great example of this.) I'd also argue Nintendo doesn't really get away with it because it's almost constantly pointed out by every gamer and games journalist. "Nintendo announced a new Zelda! Surprise! I bet there'll be a water temple!" And it's true and it's fair but in the end the water temple, the forest temple and fire temple are often damn good fun so who cares? It's easier to forgive because often (though still far from always) Nintendo just puts out a quality product.

Now, other studios also put out good products but it's harder to add variety to CoD. It's so firmly defined that you can't shake things up that much. They try and it's generally good but it's not as dramatic because it would stop being CoD. You can't really have a CoD game where suddenly there is a lot of focus on Submarine warfare in the same way you can take Metroid and suddenly make it a first person platformer/shooter. So certain games get a harder for being repetitive because they're overly focused. This wouldn't be so much of a problem if they didn't get pumped out quite so often and were quickly followed by very similar games adding to the feel of derivativeness.

The you have games that could shake things up but just don't. God of War, as an example, could easily lend itself to a side scrolling platformer/beat 'em up or a Shadow of the Colossus type game but they keep to the (very fun) 3rd person button masher . (I know there's more to it than that but you get what I mean, hopefully.) Tomb Raider tried this with it's Co-OP game but that seemed to get fairly overlooked.

I'm not buying one but simply because I don't want it, not due to boycotts or anything.

Fun things are fun and the minor changes, while minor, generally make the old things feel fresh and enjoyable again.

But it's also not really just a Nintendo thing. Nintendo does it the most, by far, but sports games do it all the time and with much more minor changes (you can make new Zelda dungeons but you can't change a football field) and everyone expects a new CoD every year. There's plenty of devs on all consoles making the same basic game over and over.

Ooh, it's the good megaman. This + Pikmin 3 might mean I'm getting a Wii U finally.

I love their videos so much though Tim minus the bread scares me a little.

FormerBox